Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Phi-3.5-MoE

Claude Opus 4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#20); Phi-3.5-MoE does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

Phi-3.5-MoE Microsoft

—

Unranked

Summary

  • Phi-3.5-MoE has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6 and Phi-3.5-MoE specifications
Claude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
ProviderAnthropicMicrosoft
Noometry Index58.2—
Released2026-02-042024-08-17
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked683

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%—
LMArena WebDev1547—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
GSO41.2%—
WeirdML78%—
LMArena Coding1536—
ALE-Bench996.5—
AlgoTune1.47—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—
Vending-Bench 28,018—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
ARC-AGI-269.2%—
SimpleBench67.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
ARC-AGI-194%—
Chess Puzzles17%—
EnigmaEval7.6%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1527—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
DTBench91.2%—
LMCA55.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24—
ForecastBench60—
PIQA—88.6%

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
GPQA Diamond90.5%—
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%—
SimpleQA Verified47%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%—
LMArena Expert1546—
BoolQ—84.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Vision1316—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Non-English1489—
LMArena Chinese1551—
LMArena French1513—
LMArena German1502—
LMArena Japanese1484—
LMArena Korean1464—
LMArena Russian1497—
LMArena Spanish1510—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Instruction Following1523—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—
LMArena Longer Query1520—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Text1503—
LMArena Creative Writing1505—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1809—
EQ-Bench 41223—
LMArena Multi-Turn1513—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Phi-3.5-MoE?

Claude Opus 4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#20); Phi-3.5-MoE does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and Phi-3.5-MoE share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Phi-3.5-MoE has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper